Contents

Procedure

Tally the vote count comparing each pair of candidates, and determine the winner of each pair (provided there is not a tie)

Sort (rank) each pair, by the largest margin of victory first to smallest last.

"Lock in" each pair, starting with the one with the largest number of winning votes, and add one in turn to a graph as long as they do not create a cycle (which would create an ambiguity). The completed graph shows the winner.

RP can also be used to create a sorted list of preferred candidates.
To create a sorted list, repeatedly use RP to select a winner,
remove that winner from the list of candidates,
and repeat (to find the next runner up, and so forth).

Tally

To tally the votes, consider each voters' preferences.
For example, if a voter states "A > B > C"
(A is better than B, and B is better than C), the tally
should add one for A in A vs. B, one for A in A vs. C, and
one for B in B vs. C.
Voters may also express indifference (e.g., A = B), and unstated
candidates are assumed to be equally worse than the stated candidates.

Once, tallied the majorities can be determined.
If "Vxy" is the number of Votes that rank x over y, then
"x" wins if Vxy > Vyx, and "y" wins if Vyx > Vxy.

Sort

The pairs of winners, called the "majorities", are then sorted from
the largest majority to the smallest majority.
A majority for x over y precedes a majority for z over w
if and only if at least one of the following conditions holds:

Vxy > Vzw. In other words, the majority having more support for its alternative is ranked first.

Vxy = Vzw and Vwz > Vyx. Where the majorities are equal, the majority with the smaller minority opposition is ranked first.

Lock

The next step is to examine each pair in turn to determine
which pairs to "lock in".
Using the sorted list above, lock in each pair in turn unless
the pair will create a circularity in a graph
(e.g., where A is more than B, B is more than C, but C is more than A).

An Example

The Situation

Imagine an election for the capital of Tennessee, a state in the United States that is over 500 miles east-to-west, and only 110 miles north-to-south. Let's say the candidates for the capital are Memphis (on the far west end), Nashville (in the center), Chattanooga (129 miles southeast of Nashville), and Knoxville (on the far east side, 114 northeast of Chattanooga). Here's the population breakdown by metro area (surrounding county):

Memphis (Shelby County): 826,330

Nashville (Davidson County): 510,784

Chattanooga (Hamilton County): 285,536

Knoxville (Knox County): 335,749

Let's say that in the vote, the voters vote based on geographic proximity. Assuming that the population distribution of the rest of Tennessee follows from those population centers, one could easily envision an election where the percentages of votes would be as follows:

[A] indicates voters who preferred the candidate listed in the column caption to the candidate listed in the row caption

[B] indicates voters who preferred the candidate listed in the row caption to the candidate listed in the column caption

[NP] indicates voters who expressed no preference between either candidate

Tally

First, list every pair, and determine the winner:

Pair

Winner

Memphis (42%) vs. Nashville (58%)

Nashville 58%

Memphis (42%) vs. Chattanooga (58%)

Chattanooga 58%

Memphis (42%) vs. Knoxville (58%)

Knoxville 58%

Nashville (68%) vs. Chattanooga (32%)

Nashville 68%

Nashville (68%) vs. Knoxville (32%)

Nashville 68%

Chattanooga (83%) vs. Knoxville (17%)

Chattanooga: 83%

Note that absolute counts of votes can be used, or
percentages of the total number of votes; it makes no difference.

Sort

The votes are then sorted.
The largest majority is "Chattanooga over Knoxville"; 83% of the
voters prefer Chattanooga.
Nashville (68%) beats both Chattanooga and Knoxville by a score
of 68% over 32% (an exact tie, which is unlikely in real life
for this many voters).
Since Chattanooga > Knoxville, and they're the losers,
Nashville vs. Knoxville will be added first, followed by
Nashville vs. Chattanooga.

Thus, the pairs from above would be sorted this way:

Pair

Winner

Chattanooga (83%) vs. Knoxville (17%)

Chattanooga 83%

Nashville (68%) vs. Knoxville (32%)

Nashville 68%

Nashville (68%) vs. Chattanooga (32%)

Nashville 68%

Memphis (42%) vs. Nashville (58%)

Nashville 58%

Memphis (42%) vs. Chattanooga (58%)

Chattanooga 58%

Memphis (42%) vs. Knoxville (58%)

Knoxville 58%

Lock

The pairs are then locked in order, skipping any pairs
that would create a cycle:

Lock Chattanooga over Knoxville.

Lock Nashville over Knoxville.

Lock Nashville over Chattanooga.

Lock Nashville over Memphis.

Lock Chattanooga over Memphis.

Lock Knoxville over Memphis.

In this case, no cycles are created by any of the
pairs, so every single one is locked in.

Every "lock in" would add another arrow to the
graph showing the relationship between the candidates.
Here is the final graph (where arrows point from
the winner).